Under Review: GMs to Pitch Replay

[missionhockey21]

Under Review: GMs to Pitch Replay
By HAL BODLEY, USA TODAY

Click here for great deals from Dell!

Commissioner Bud Selig has made it clear he doesn't want instant replay in baseball.

Even Los Angeles Angels manager Mike Scioscia, who had a dreadful call go against his team in the American League Championship Series, says leave calls to the human element of umpiring.

That, however, won't stop big-league general managers from debating the issue during their weeklong annual meetings, which opened Monday.

Instant replay isn't on the official agenda for the meetings, which typically serve as a period to lay groundwork for possible trades and free agent signings. But with all the controversial calls, many of which were proved incorrect by network TV, it's certain to be a heated subject before the executives head home Friday.

The Atlanta Braves' John Schuerholz, dean of GMs with 25 years, doesn't budge when the subject comes up.

"I'm 65 years old and have been in baseball 40 years," says Schuerholz, whose club has won 14 consecutive division titles. "I'm certainly not in favor of it. The great thing about our game is that it's a game played by humans. Shortstops make errors, pitchers make bad pitches and every once in a while an umpire might make a bad judgment."

Schuerholz, however, thinks discussing instant replay is worthwhile. "You have to keep your mind open, and that's healthy," he says. "Look at the pros and cons."

As former Houston Astros GM Gerry Hunsicker watched the playoffs on TV, he began to think there might be room for instant replay.

"Part of me is a purist and doesn't like to think about instant replay coming into baseball," says Hunsicker, now the Tampa Bay Devil Rays senior vice president for baseball operations. "But in the spirit of what umpires have been trying to do in the last few years - trying to get the play right as their primary goal - I do think there's a place for it.

"The problem is how do you limit it so that our three-hour games don't become five-hour games? Maybe you should start out using it for certain kinds of plays, like the home run - fair or foul.

"At Minute Maid Park (in Houston) it's very difficult for umpires in certain areas to see if the ball hit above the line or below the line."

New York Mets GM Omar Minaya says it's worth discussing replays to determine if balls are fair or foul. "If it's ever used, it has to be very limited," he says. "Really, I'm not for it."

Milwaukee Brewers GM Doug Melvin says each time general managers have discussed instant replay it was agreed the only instance it could be considered for "would be whether balls are home runs or not home runs, with boundaries involved."

"To have it involved in the action of the game is difficult - like if a guy does or doesn't make a shoestring catch with two men on base. Then, they go to the replay and determine it's not a catch. Which bases do the runners return to?" he says. "There was talk that, if used, it should never interrupt the flow of play."

The Oakland Athletics' Billy Beane says, "I can see it used for home runs. To use it on a play where there might be continuation would not be good."

St. Louis Cardinals GM Walt Jocketty says, "All of us who watch games on TV are able to see plays slowed down over and over again. The umpires are trained to make a quick decision based on what they see.

"I would like them, if there's a question, to ask for help. I think they've gotten away from that a little bit - getting together to make a consensus call."

11/08/2005 07:06

Article Link

[Fishercat]

Depends on the limitations. I don't really have a problem with the length of the games, shorter than some other sports at the least. Having a replay official ready in a booth looking at questionable safe/out (meaning at the bases), fair/foul (for HRs both ways, although I don't think it can be done where a foul, in-play call is turned fair, since there are many variables), HR/not HR (I would think that if it is called a HR and isn't, a double is a fair ruling, but that's another issue).

I'd prefer to see a game get the call right and *gasp*, waste a couple minutes.

[Witlon]

First bit of good news to come from the Winter Meetings.

It has to be done, at least for the playoffs. The regular season doesn't matter, replay should be there for the playoffs, though.

[ATLien]

As if the games weren't long enough already.. I don't like this.

[CincyRedsFan30]

I like it.

Everyone goes on about how long the games are, but they are usually around three hours, just like the NFL games are(which of course use replay too, which seems to be liked by most fans).

[love_that_reefer]

Depends on the limitations. I don't really have a problem with the length of the games, shorter than some other sports at the least. Having a replay official ready in a booth looking at questionable safe/out (meaning at the bases), fair/foul (for HRs both ways, although I don't think it can be done where a foul, in-play call is turned fair, since there are many variables), HR/not HR (I would think that if it is called a HR and isn't, a double is a fair ruling, but that's another issue).

I'd prefer to see a game get the call right and *gasp*, waste a couple minutes.

There are too many variables in all those you stated except hr/no hr. Safe/out is a judgement call and that's why the umpires are out there. There are enough umpires on that field to get a call correct. Not a fan of this idea despite everything that happened or didn't happen this postseason and years past.

[Fishercat]

Yeah, good point on safe/out. Would it be possible to make that only possible on a potential third out? It would be abused otherwise.

[love_that_reefer]

Not gonna happen and thank whoever.

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/a...=.jsp&c_id=mlb